Posted on 07/11/2011 4:35:32 PM PDT by MissesBush
Officials familiar with the negotiations say today’s meeting began with President Obama asking House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., to lay out what was agreed upon in the deficit reduction talks led by Vice President Biden.
Cantor outlined around $2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade: $1–1.1 trillion in discretionary spending; $200 billion in mandatory discretionary spending (such as civilian military retirement and farm subsidies); $200 billion in Medicare and Medicaid; and roughly $200-300 billion in saved interest on the debt.
After Cantor’s presentation, the President said the two sides might be able to reach consensus on roughly $1.7 trillion, though there were still some issues to resolve.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has said the amount they agree to in deficit reduction needs to be equal to – if not more than – the amount they agree to raise the debt ceiling.
How much is that? There seemed to be consensus in the room that the amount by which they need to raise the debt ceiling is $2.4 trillion.
That would get the government to February or March 2013. Why that date? No one thinks a lame duck Congress should take this on from November-January 2012/2013 and that would allow the new Congress and maybe a new President to get his or her sea legs before addressing this again.
So tomorrow’s homework assignment, the president said, is for the congressional leaders to figure out how to get from $1.7 trillion to $2.4 trillion.
Republicans are still insisting on no new taxes. Democrats say they need some revenues – a “balanced approach” – to get Democratic votes. As House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, said today, “Republicans must be prepared to make concessions of their own and not put the entire burden on seniors, the middle class and the most vulnerable among us."
Congressional leaders will need Democratic votes not only in the Senate but the House as well. “You’ve got the (Michele) Bachmann Caucus that has made it clear they won’t vote for anything,” one Democratic official said.
Boehner said at one point that “it’s clear to all of us how big this spending problem is. Congress keeps voting for programs we can’t pay for. But look, entitlement cuts aren’t easy for us to vote for either. Our guys aren’t cheerleading about cutting entitlements.”
“Your guys already voted for them,” the president said, referring to the budget offered by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc.
“Excuse us for trying to lead,” Boehner said.
The president today continued to make the case for a big deal, arguing that if they’re going to draw heat for the deal, they should at least do more than make a down payment on the deficit – they should get the country on sounder financial footing and begin to seriously bend the deficit cost curve.
During another exchange, Republicans were going through proposed tax increases as bad for jobs.
"C’mon, man!” Vice President Biden exclaimed, “let’s get real!"
The Vice President argued that their opposition isn't economic, it's ideological, that no real economist thinks they're "job killers."
In terms of the big deal President Obama and Speaker Boehner discussed in the past – for around $4 trillion in deficit reduction --, Democrats say the Republicans walked away from major spending cuts, entitlement reform, and tax reform, all because part of the trigger mechanism if the tax reform was not achieved by the end of 2012 was the risk that the Bush tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans would have expired. Democrats insisted that one commitment for tax reform needed to be that the new code needed to be “at least as progressive” as the current tax code.
“Ronald Reagan would have accepted this plan,” one of the Democratic officials said.
The meeting broke after about an hour and a half.
“We’ll meet tomorrow at the White House at 3:45,” the president said.
“A.M. or P.M.?” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., joked.
“It may come to that,” the president said.
-Jake Tapper
Is it just me, or was anyone else surprised to find out this guy was let in the meeting?
Spend trillions - more than we have and more than we can borrow for.
Then, with a straight face, exclaim that to get on the right track, tax increases are needed.
Bullshet. Cut the crap from the last few years.
Just damn.
It is called showboating.
the question the WH still hasn’t answered is: WHY do we have to raise the debt ceiling “2.4 trillion more” ? and until I hear a perfectly valid reason, I cannot see raising it one red cent
“Let’s remember we don’t control the Senate and White House. Let’s get control of those, then we can talk about bigger things. We can only do what we’re realistically capable of getting done. The rest will come later.”
I disagree. The House is where all spending and revenue is generated. On top of that there alot of Senate Democrats that will vote with GOP because they can read the tea leaves. Pun intended.
House needs to stick together and Obama will fold like a cheap suit.
Exactly. Constitutionally, the House has the power over spending and taxing. The only reason that they are worried is that the Mediacracy (MSM) has had more power than the government to define the debate.
The conservatives have some media now, but the sources that most politicians are familiar with and most accustomed to kowtowing to, are all MSM.
The House GOP should simply pass their budget...with a commensurate cap increase...and GO HOME for normal recess.
I think Joe just made up that argument and probably has no facts to back it up. I know of numerous economists who think high marginal income tax rates are job killers. Here's an example of some of this economic research: The Small Business Tax Hike and the 97% Fallacy
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703959704575454061524326290.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Link to this editorial here:
Then, why did Cantor famously walk out of the Biden meetings?
Likely, those were the cuts that Biden and the Republicans had agreed upon -- but the Republicans were shooting for twice that total and Biden would go no further.
Most affluent seniors are getting much more in benefits than they ever paid into Social Security and Medicare. But congress doesn't have the courage to take on the senior lobbies and stop the endless flow of wealth to seniors from people under age 50. My parents were very affluent in the last ten years of their lives, although they wouldn't have qualified as "rich" by most definitions. They had their mortgage paid off and health care provided by a state workers' retirement plan. They had much more discretionary income than I had, but I was paying taxes to them to fund my dad's social security checks, which were twice the amount he really needed. The whole situation was ludicrous and yet this continues unabated today because politicians will not tell the truth to affluent seniors that they are getting a free ride from young people and getting much more from entitlement programs than they ever paid into them.
At some point, this has to stop or these programs will certainly go bankrupt. People cannot keep receiving much more than they pay into programs--that's a Ponzi scheme and eventually all Ponzi schemes fall apart. Listen up you folks in Washingon, because of crazy stuff like this and the dishonesty of politicians, America is losing all faith and trust in Washington. If all this madness continues, more fiscal conservatives like Rand Paul will be elected until we solve these problems.
Yup yup and double yup.
All this hoohah will amount to failure. They’ve already voted on what they wanted, and passed it. There you go “Mr.” President and Senate. Cards on the table.
Joe “BFD” Biden. B*te me, Joe!
“Cantor outlined around $2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade: $1–1.1 trillion in discretionary spending; $200 billion in mandatory discretionary spending (such as civilian military retirement and farm subsidies); $200 billion in Medicare and Medicaid; and roughly $200-300 billion in saved interest on the debt.”
Here’s my take on this. We are getting around $150-200 billion in cuts. That’s all. No more. I take their $2 trillion number and divide it by 10, to get what they will cut now. Over the next decade? That’s a joke. Anything in the outlying years will not be cut. Why do I say this? Because it’s never cut. As soon as they get their credit line increase, it’ll be off to the races again, and in February 2013, they’ll be asking for a $4 trillion increase in the debt ceiling.
For me, if this is what the GOP is going for, there really is no point in voting GOP.
I agree 100%. If the GOP would hold together, they could name their price and Obama would pay it. Obama cannot risk shutting down the government because for he and his ilk, government is their whole reason for being. It is their religion, it is their life. If the government shut down for any amount of time, they run the risk of people realizing they really don’t need that much government.
Alas, it won’t happen. This will be Bailout 2. The Bachmann Caucus will hold firm, but the “Statesman”... those same “Statesman” who brought us the Bailout will all band together again, and the insanity will continue. They’ll use the same arguments, too. The world will end if we don’t raise the debt ceiling. Just as it would have ended if we didn’t have the Bailout. That was BS then, and it’s BS now.
He’s got to be the biggest dew fuss that has ever occupied the vice president’s chair.
I say we tar and feather them ALL!
The GOP will insist on cuts of $400 to $500 billion in the first year (FY 12). This downpayment is critical to changing the baseline for future years.
Hang with the team. And let your congressman and senators know that you support Boehner and not Obama.
If we do not stick together, we are finished in 2012, and so is the nation.
You’re forgetting the filibuster. Sure the GOP could probably get 3 or 4 moderate Dems to vote for bigger cuts but if you think Reid would ever let it get out of the Senate I’ve got a swamp to sell you in Florida. The thing would be filibustered into oblivion. And even in the million to one shot it ever made it to Obama’s desk he’d vetoed it without even skipping a beat. No way is Obama going to go into the 2012 elections without his base. Under those circumstances $200 billion a year may be the best we can do with no tax hikes. I say call it a victory and a good start and go home to work on getting the Senate and the White House so we can do much more in 2013.
As opposed to ten times. Considering that the Slave Party has bloated government 35% in the last two years, that the Republican position on the rollback is not even close to that is absurd. I don't care a bit how much screaming there is, what it will accomplish is expose the magnitude of failure and start the discussion on real terms as to what it's going to take to fix it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.